Kerala High Court
Aljo Joseph vs Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd on 6 October, 2021
WP(C) No.11003/2021 1/7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
Wednesday, the 6th day of October 2021 / 14th Aswina, 1943
IA.NO.3/2021 IN WP(C) NO. 11003 OF 2021(A)
PETITIONER:
ALJO JOSEPH, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. P.K.JOSEPH, PUTHUPPARA HOUSE,
KIDANGOOR P.O., ANGAMALY-683572.
RESPONDENTS:
1. DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, ANGAMALY
BRANCH, DHANALAKSHMI BUILDING, NAICKANAL, THRISSUR-680001.
2. THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, COMPANY LAW BHAVAN, KAKKANAD,
KOCHI-682030.
3. JASIN JOSE, 5D, SKYLINE RIVERSCAPE, THOTTUMUGHAM, ALUVA,
KERALA-683101.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to pass an order to
extend the order of stay granted by this Hon'ble Court in the judgment
dated 06-09-2021 for further period of one month, in the interest of
justice.
This Application coming on for orders upon perusing the application
and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and this Court's Judgment
dated 06-09-2021 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.P.B.KRISHNAN,
V.K.PEERMOHAMED KHAN & GIRISH KUMAR V.C, Advocates for the petitioner in
IA/WP(C), SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, STANDING COUNSEL for R1 in IA/WP(C),
SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA for R2 in IA/WP(C), M/S.MOHAN JACOB
GEORGE, P.V.PARVATHY, REENA THOMAS, NIGI GEORGE & M.JITHESH MENON,
Advocates for R3 in IA/WP(C), the court passed the following:
WP(C) No.11003/2021 2/7
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
==============================================================
I.A. No. 3 of 2021
in
W.P.(C) No.11003 of 2021 -A
===================================================================================
Dated this the 6th day of October, 2021
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
The above writ petition is disposed of by this Court with
following directions:
"Hence, this writ petition is disposed in the
following manner:
i) The interim order dated 19.05.2021 which is in
force even now will continue for a period of 30
days from today.
ii) The petitioner is free to file appeal against Ext.
P6 order before the appellate authority as per
Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,
2016 in the meanwhile.
iii) If an appeal is filed by the petitioner within 30
days from today, the appellate authority will treat it
WP(C) No.11003/2021 3/7
W.P.(C). No. 11003 of 2021
as an appeal within time and consider the same in
accordance to law.
iv) All other contentions raised by the petitioner in
this writ petition are left open."
2. This interlocutory application is filed by the
petitioner with certain grievance. It will be better to extract
the relevant portion in the affidavit filed along with the
application.
"In pursuance with the direction of this Hon'ble
court in the above matter, the petitioner herein
being the suspended director has filed appeal
before the NCLAT, Chennai Bench under the
provisions of Sec.61 of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 as on 30.09.2021. The
appeal memorandum along with annexures have
been uploaded through online and thus
successfully filed the appeal on the files of NCLAT,
Chennai bench as per filing No.
9805117/01454/2021 dated 01.10.2021 along
with proof of service against 1st respondent bank
herein.
WP(C) No.11003/2021 4/7
W.P.(C). No. 11003 of 2021
4. It is submitted that following the filing of the
appeal through online and after successful filing
of the same petitioner filed required copies of
memorandum of appeal before the NCLAT,
Chennai bench for completing the process of
filing. The petitioner understands that the registry
of NCLAT, Chennai bench may take more time to
finally verify the above appeal memorandum and
to list the matter before bench for consideration
after numbering it. Petitioner also filed petition
seeking stay of operation of impugned order along
with other petition and memo for urgent moving
before the NCLAT, Chennai Bench. But,
irrespective of the same it may take at least further
one month time to take up the appeal and stay
petition before the NCLAT Chennai bench
especially due to the restrictions owing to the
Covid-19 pandemic situation. More over,
petitioner further understands that due the reason
of continuous holidays owing to Pooja and
Deepavali celebrations, delay may be caused for
listing the matter before the bench and for
conducting the hearing of the case. Apart from
these, there are certain matters pending before the
Honorable Supreme Court of India in respect of
WP(C) No.11003/2021 5/7
W.P.(C). No. 11003 of 2021
the appointment and conducting the sitting by the
Judicial Members of NCLAT in Principal bench at
New Delhi and at various benches, including
Chennai bench. But the order of stay of operation
of the impugned order as granted by this Hon'ble
court expires as on 06.10.2021 and therefore it is
highly essential and necessary that the order of
stay granted by the Hon'ble court in the judgment
dated 06.09.2021 may be extend for further
period of one month to meet the interest of justice.
Seeking such a relief a separate petition is filed
along with this and that may be allowed, otherwise
we will be put to irreparable injury, loss and
hardship."
3. In the petition, the petitioner prayed for an
extension of the interim order granted by this Court for a
further period of one month.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents opposed
the prayer. The learned counsel submitted that the application
itself is not maintainable and if the petitioner wants extension
a review petition is to be filed. It is also submitted that this
WP(C) No.11003/2021 6/7
W.P.(C). No. 11003 of 2021
Court granted 30 days and meanwhile the appeal already filed
and thereafter, there cannot be any extension.
It is true that there is some force in the arguments of the
respondents. But considering the averments in the affidavit
and considering the special circumstances pointed out in the
affidavit, I think a short extension can be granted with a rider
that no such application will be entertained in future. The
prayer in the application cannot be allowed as such. An
extension of two weeks granted from today. Therefore, the
time fixed in direction No.1 in the judgment dated 06.09.2021
in W.P.(C) No.11003 of 2021 is extended for a further period
of two weeks from today. Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
das
06-10-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
WP(C) No.11003/2021 7/7
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11003/2021
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.4.2021 IN
IBA/41/KOB/2020.
